# Abstinence from Sexual Activity Until Marriage: Now U.S. Government Policy **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 17, 2006, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042 "2006-04-17T18:57:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/101 "2006-04-18T21:07:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have a thought: why don’t we vote for members of some sort of group of representatives? Then those representatives could decide how to allocate our tax dollars. That seems fair to us both. Let’s just see how that works out for you later this year… 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/102 "2006-04-18T21:11:02Z")
Is anybody else a little creeped-out by the color scheme? The similarities to Homeland Security give me the willies. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/103 "2006-04-18T21:20:03Z")
Be thankful this curriculum doesn´t mention incubus and succubus. (what´s the plural of those anyway, incubae?) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/104 "2006-04-18T21:26:49Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Well, I’ve shown you a specific website funded, as near as I can tell, with money from this program. This is a website designed for teenagers. If there’s going to be explicit information, wouldn’t it be there? > > Can you describe what you think this explicit information might look like? As I said, I can’t imagine how it could appear. These programs are promoted by folks who got Donna Shalala fired for recommending mutual masturbation for teenagers. I don’t think they’re going to have ANY list of “Okay” activities for kids to engage in. Perfect. **bup** has found exactly what I was picturing: ```auto A second activity further depicts the “steps to physical intimacy;” students are instructed to put the following ten cards, color-coded according to the level of caution required, in order: Green: Yellow: Orange: Red: Eye to body Hand to hand Hand to head Hand to body (intimate touching) Eye to eye Hand to shoulder Face to face Sexual intercourse Voice to voice Hand to waist ``` But this curriculum does NOT say that these activities are physically harmful. > [@](#): > > The curriculum then provides a continuum of sexual behavior; printed along a shaded line that starts out as light pink and then darkens to a deep red are the following steps, “Holding hands \> Hugging \> Kissing \> Deep Kissing \> Sexual Activity \> Sexual Intercourse.” (Navigator, workbook, p. 73) The curriculum has students place a line indicating where they think a friend should stop if he or she wants to remain abstinent. The Guide Book recommends that teachers “place a line between kissing and deep kissing. Next to the line, write ‘this is where most teens encourage other teens to draw the line in order to avoid arousal and be successful at abstinence.’” (Navigator, Guide Book, p. 73) They go on to offer the same criticisms that have been broached above: > [@](#): > > Navigator’s discussion of STDs is incomplete and once again relies on fear rather than facts. The curriculum states “any type of sexual activity can spread STDs from one person to another.” (Navigator, Guide Book, p. 40) In its own definition of abstinence, however, Navigator says “sexual activity refers to any type of genital contact or sexual stimulation including, but not limited to, sexual intercourse.” Given that such a broad definition could easily encompass masturbation in front of a partner, petting with clothes on, or a particularly good foot massage, telling students that all sexual activity can spread STDs is neither accurate nor informative. Students would be better served by an open and honest discussion of the means of STD transmission and the level of risks associated with a variety of sexual behaviors. Notwithstanding, _Navigator_ apparently never makes the direct claim that masturbation in front of a partner, petting with clothes on, or a particularly good foot massage is a vector for STD transmission. Since we see that the curriculum DOES mention specifics, it’s hard for me to accept that the mere inference you want me to make is solid. The curriculum does not want us to believe that a foot massage can transmit STDs, does it? Yet that, too, falls into a broad reading of the ‘sexual stimulation’ phrase, as the cite itself points out. Sorry - if you want to condemn this program for teaching absolute inaccuracy, then you need more than this inference: you need to point to a statement that is itself unquestionably wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/105 "2006-04-18T21:27:32Z")
I just remembered the latin lesson in “The Life of Brian”, it should be incubi and succubi. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/106 "2006-04-18T21:32:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Notwithstanding, _Navigator_ apparently never makes the direct claim that masturbation in front of a partner, petting with clothes on, or a particularly good foot massage is a vector for STD transmission. Since we see that the curriculum DOES mention specifics, it’s hard for me to accept that the mere inference you want me to make is solid. The curriculum does not want us to believe that a foot massage can transmit STDs, does it? Yet that, too, falls into a broad reading of the ‘sexual stimulation’ phrase, as the cite itself points out. Sorry - if you want to condemn this program for teaching absolute inaccuracy, then you need more than this inference: you need to point to a statement that is itself unquestionably wrong. Did you catch the Hershey’s Kiss lesson plan, in which they suggest that once you start, you can’t stop? That’s the method they use for condemning deep kissing: it’s likely to lead to jigginess, and jigginess is likely to lead to problems. **Shayna** ’s cite is also very relevant, listing specific inaccuracies in these programs, including a program that suggests that mutual masturbation can get you pregnant. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/107 "2006-04-18T21:33:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\*The _Navigator_ critque said: > It begins this discussion by analyzing the label on a typical box of condoms which states “if used properly, latex condoms will help to reduce the risk of transmission of HIV infection (AIDS) and many other sexually transmitted diseases. Also highly effective against pregnancy.” (Navigator, Guide Book, p. 46) The Guide Book prompts the teacher to ask the students “what kinds of things have warnings? The answer: “Things that are dangerous.” (Navigator, Guide Book, p. 46) Condoms have warning labels. Dangerous things have warning labels. Therefore, condoms are dangerous. :eek: Is anyone else horrified that they’re actually teaching kids that condoms are dangerous? :mad: ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/108 "2006-04-18T21:34:14Z")
OK, **Brick** , I was missing the forest for the trees. You kept wanting specific stuff about what was sexual behavior and not. Your conclusions are premature, however, because here’s more on _The Navigator_: > [@](#): > > [“As condom usage has increased, so have rates of STDs,” reads a lesson taken from Navigator teaching guide, one of the more popular abstinence-only curricula cited in Waxman’s report. In another curriculum’s teaching guide, the lesson goes so far as to directly question whether safer-sex measures make any difference at all, saying that **“the popular claim that condoms help prevent the spread of STDs is not supported by the data.” These claims have been repeatedly contradicted by both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and numerous experts.**](http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:1ZUgXor1_skJ:www.metroland.net/back_issues/vol_27_no50/newsfront.html+%22Community-Based+Abstinence+Education+Program%22+support+navigator&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=firefox-a) Emphasis added. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/109 "2006-04-18T21:36:59Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > **Shayna** ’s cite is also very relevant, listing specific inaccuracies in these programs, including a program that suggests that mutual masturbation can get you pregnant. Unless the mutual masturbators are the same sex. Then it leads to AIDS. OK, that’s not in there, but I think it’s true. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/110 "2006-04-18T21:40:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sorry - if you want to condemn this program for teaching absolute inaccuracy, then you need more than this inference: you need to point to a statement that is itself unquestionably wrong. [http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/abstinenceonlycontent.pdf](http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/abstinenceonlycontent.pdf) > [@](#): > > **Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain False Information about the Effectiveness of Contraceptives.** Many of the curricula misrepresent the effectiveness of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. One curriculum says that “the popular claim that ‘condoms help prevent the spread of STDs,’ is not supported by the data”; another states that “\*n heterosexual sex, condoms fail to prevent HIV approximately 31% of the time”; and another teaches that a pregnancy occurs one out of every seven times that couples use condoms. These erroneous statements are presented as proven scientific facts. > [@](#): > > **Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain False Information about the Risks of Abortion.** One curriculum states that 5% to 10% of women who have legal abortions will become sterile; that “[p]remature birth, a major cause of mental retardation, is increased following the abortion of a first pregnancy”; and that “[t]ubal and cervical pregnancies are increased following abortions.” In fact, these risks do not rise after the procedure used in most abortions in the United States. > [@](#): > > **Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain Scientific Errors.** In numerous instances, the abstinence-only curricula teach erroneous scientific information. One curriculum incorrectly lists exposure to sweat and tears as risk factors for HIV transmission. Another curriculum states that “twenty-four chromosomes from the mother and twenty-four chromosomes from the father join to create this new individual”; the correct number is 23. > [@](#): > > Other abstinence-only curricula contest CDC’s finding that “latex condoms provide an essentially impermeable barrier to particles the size of STD pathogens.”[sup]33[/sup] These curricula rely on the false idea that HIV and other pathogens can “pass through” condoms. One curriculum instructs students to: Think on a microscopic level. Sperm cells, STI organisms, and HIV cannot be seen with the naked eye — you need a microscope. Any imperfections in the contraceptive not visible to the eye, could allow sperm, STI, or HIV to pass through. . . . The size difference between a sperm cell and the HIV virus can be roughly related to the difference between the size of a football field and a football.[sup]34[/sup] The same curriculum states, “The actual ability of condoms to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS even if the product is intact, is not definitively known.”[sup]35[/sup] This distorts CDC’s finding and scientific consensus. > > One curriculum draws an analogy between the HIV virus and a penny and compares it to a sperm cell (“Speedy the Sperm”), which on the same scale would be almost 19 feet long. The curriculum asks, “If the condom has a failure rate of 14% in preventing ‘Speedy’ from getting through to create a new life, what happens if this guy (penny) gets through? You have a death: your own.”[sup]36[/sup] Is that enough for you? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/111 "2006-04-18T21:43:06Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > Would you accept a report titled, “THE CONTENT OF FEDERALLY FUNDED ABSTINENCE-ONLY EDUCATION PROGRAMS” that was prepared by the Minority Staff Special Investigation Division for the United States House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform? Even if it was prepared for a Democrat? Here’s the relevant portion of the report’s Table of Contents (bolding mine): Let’s look at the specifics: > [@](#): > > Several curricula cite an erroneous 1993 study of condom effectiveness that has been discredited by federal health officials. The 1993 study, by Dr. Susan Weller, looked at a variety of condom effectiveness studies and concluded that condoms reduce HIV transmission by 69%.27 Dr. Weller’s conclusions were rejected by the Department of Health and Human Services, which issued a statement in 1997 informing the public that “FDA and CDC believe this analysis was flawed.”28 The Department cited numerous methodological problems, including the mixing of data on consistent condom use with data on inconsistent condom use, and found that Dr. Weller’s calculation of a 69% effectiveness rate was based on “serious error.”29 In fact, CDC noted that “[o]ther studies of discordant couples — more recent and larger than the ones Weller reviewed, and conducted over several years — have demonstrated that consistent condom use is highly effective at preventing HIV infection.”30 > > Despite these findings, several curricula refer approvingly to the Weller study. One curriculum teaches: “A meticulous review of condom effectiveness was reported by Dr. Susan Weller in 1993. She found that condoms were even less likely to protect people from HIV infection. Condoms appear to reduce the risk of heterosexual HIV infection by only 69%.”31 Another curriculum that cites Dr. Weller’s data claims: “In heterosexual sex, condoms fail to prevent HIV approximately 31% of the time.”32 So the curricula relies on a published report - one with which other published reports disagree. I don’t see a flat-out falsehood here. The curriculum reports Weller’s study correctly. This curriculum is obviously not presenting an unbiased and neutral report of all available data. BUT NEITHER ARE THEY LYING. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/112 "2006-04-18T21:44:15Z")
> [@bup](#): > > OK, **Brick** , I was missing the forest for the trees. You kept wanting specific stuff about what was sexual behavior and not. > > Your conclusions are premature, however, because here’s more on _The Navigator_: > Emphasis added. Sure. And the Weller study disagrees. So the curriculum reports one study and not the others. Biased? Sure. Outright falsehood? No. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/113 "2006-04-18T21:46:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. And the Weller study disagrees. So the curriculum reports one study and not the others. Biased? Sure. Outright falsehood? No. I’d say yes, it is. It’s a lie by omission. If you use government money to tell folks about a controversial study, one which the federal government itself says is seriously flawed, and you don’t tell them that the study is controversial, that’s intentionally misleading. And it’s outrageous that tax dollars are going toward teaching children intentionally misleading information. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/114 "2006-04-18T21:50:08Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > [http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/abstinenceonlycontent.pdf](http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/abstinenceonlycontent.pdf) > Is that enough for you? One by one: > [@](#): > > Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain False Information about the Effectiveness of Contraceptives. Many of the curricula misrepresent the effectiveness of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. One curriculum says that “the popular claim that ‘condoms help prevent the spread of STDs,’ is not supported by the data”; another states that “\*n heterosexual sex, condoms fail to prevent HIV approximately 31% of the time”; and another teaches that a pregnancy occurs one out of every seven times that couples use condoms. These erroneous statements are presented as proven scientific facts. They are relying on the Weller study. A legitimate criticism is that the curricula is biased. But if they are truthfully reporting the Weller study, then they’re truthfully reporting the Weller study. > [@](#): > > Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain False Information about the Risks of Abortion. One curriculum states that 5% to 10% of women who have legal abortions will become sterile; that “[p]remature birth, a major cause of mental retardation, is increased following the abortion of a first pregnancy”; and that “[t]ubal and cervical pregnancies are increased following abortions.” In fact, these risks do not rise after the procedure used in most abortions in the United States. And are the curricula discussing only abortions in the United States? > [@](#): > > Abstinence-Only Curricula Contain Scientific Errors. In numerous instances, the abstinence-only curricula teach erroneous scientific information. One curriculum incorrectly lists exposure to sweat and tears as risk factors for HIV transmission. Another curriculum states that “twenty-four chromosomes from the mother and twenty-four chromosomes from the father join to create this new individual”; the correct number is 23. Well, you got me there. But I’m willing to bet the authors would be agreeable to amending their materials to reflect 23 chromosones. Still, I agree that this is an outright falsehood. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/115 "2006-04-18T21:54:56Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > I’d say yes, it is. It’s a lie by omission. If you use government money to tell folks about a controversial study, one which the federal government itself says is seriously flawed, and you don’t tell them that the study is controversial, that’s intentionally misleading. And it’s outrageous that tax dollars are going toward teaching children intentionally misleading information. You’re right. I agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/116 "2006-04-18T23:21:29Z")
**Bricker** , **LHoD** already addressed your first point to me, and you agreed with him, so I’ll leave it at that. > [@](#): > > And are the curricula discussing only abortions in the United States? You aren’t seriously asking that question, are you? They aren’t “discussing” abortions, period. They’re scaring impressionable young children who _live in the United States_, and who, if they were to ever consider an abortion, would likely seek one _in the United States_, with outright falsehoods about what could happen to them if they do so, knowing full well that they’d be getting one _in the United States_, not some Third World country without modern medical techniques. Besides which, I only quoted the condensed summary for that section. If you read further to page 17 of the .pdf (page 13 of the report), you’ll see that they’re misusing information that is more than 30 years outdated. Yet another lie by omission that you conceded above was outrageous to use tax dollars to teach. > [@](#): > > Well, you got me there. > > But I’m willing to bet the authors would be agreeable to amending their materials to reflect 23 chromosones. Still, I agree that this is an outright falsehood. You and your betting. No thanks. How about I pull a **Bricker** and ask you to demonstrate that since this report was issued over a year ago, which grant recipients who use that particular curricula have actually changed it. But it’s not just that they made a typo or a simple, correctable error. They give further scientifically inacurate information such as > [@](#): > > The same curriculum also teaches: “Girls produce only female ovum, boys, however, have both male and female sperm.”[sup]103[/sup] This too is inaccurate. Females produce ova with X chromosomes, and males produce sperm with either X or Y chromosomes. These combine to make an XX combination (female) or an XY combination (male). Want some more? > [@](#): > > Another curriculum presents misleading information about the risk of pregnancy from sexual activity other than intercourse. The curriculum erroneously states that touching another person’s genitals “can result in pregnancy.”[sup]52[/sup] You don’t find that outrageous? I won’t even get into all the bullshit stereotypes they teach, but there’s more factually incorrect information as well, such as. . . > [@](#): > > One curriculum makes a spurious claim about chlamydia’s health effects: The Institute of Medicine states, “. . . the full clinical spectrum of many > STDs is still being described.”. . . [An] example is that studies are finding chlamydia in the atherosclerotic plaque (‘hardening of the arteries’) that is often the cause of heart attack and strokes many Americans suffer. Some researchers are suggesting that chlamydia may actually cause this problem. Only time and good research will tell.[sup]97[/sup] In fact, the research cited in the curriculum found an association between heart disease and a type of chlamydia (called Chlamydia pneumoniae) that is not sexually transmitted.[sup]98[/sup] This bacteria spreads from person to person through respiratory transmission and is a common cause of pneumonia among children and adolescents.[sup]99[/sup] It is an entirely different bacteria from Chlamydia trachomatis, which is sexually transmitted. This is really, really dangerous misinformation to poison children’s minds with. It’s not just that they lie to children that sex can cause heart disease and stroke, which is in itself false, but children who take this course now believe they _won’t_ be at risk for chlamydia-related heart disease or strokes if they simply avoid sexual intercourse. That’s a contemptible lie to tell! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2006, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/117 "2006-04-19T00:14:21Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > You aren’t seriously asking that question, are you? They aren’t “discussing” abortions, period. They’re scaring impressionable young children who _live in the United States_, and who, if they were to ever consider an abortion, would likely seek one _in the United States_, with outright falsehoods about what could happen to them if they do so, knowing full well that they’d be getting one _in the United States_, not some Third World country without modern medical techniques. You may have lost track of what was being contended. Did their comments cross into outright falsehood? If you have to posit what they “know full well,” then it doesn’t. It’s a sleazy trick worthy of a used-car salesman, sure. And I agree that such tactics are also an inappropriate and unwise use of tax dollars. ---
**Author:** ![Jotun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/46a35a/32.png) [@Jotun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jotun)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2006, 9:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/118 "2006-04-19T09:10:08Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > Is anyone else horrified that they’re actually teaching kids that condoms are dangerous? :mad: Perhaps they are worried that a child will accidentally suffocate themselves with the improper use of a condom? 😛 I’m surprised nobody brought up my favourite. HIV can be spread by sweat and tears, well, at least according to Bill Frist. He sorta backpedalled on ABC’s _This Week_ with George Stephanopoulos though. It was my favourite Daily Show topic, and also my favourite Lewis Black rant. I think it outlines just how rediculous some of the “facts” that come out of Abstinence Only Education can be. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2006, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/119 "2006-04-19T15:30:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. And the Weller study disagrees. So the curriculum reports one study and not the others. Biased? Sure. Outright falsehood? No. > [@Bricker earlier this thread](#): > > The teaching of factually incorrect information should never (apart, perhaps, from a wartime, foreign-oriented propaganda or tactical disinformation effort) be government funded. > > However, I’m not completely persuaded that this program may be condemned on that basis. “Teaching of factually incorrect info” became “outright falsehood.” I think we’ve well demonstrated “teaching of factually incorrect info.” I’m arguing from intellectual honesty, so I’ll also throw this out (best info I could find): [Condom sales up 25% 1994-2004](http://www.amfar.org/cgi-bin/iowa/td/feature/record.html?record=131) [Some STD’s up (Chlamydia up 100%!) 1995-2005, some down](http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:8z-Nl-ehz28J:www.cdc.gov/std/stats03/trends2003.htm+std+RATE+trends+united+states&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-a) I can’t determine if STD rates overall have gone up. I’m really surprised, though, I have to admit. I thought there’d be a very direct correlation evident, even if incidence of sex has increased too. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2006, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042/120 "2006-04-19T17:55:00Z")
> [@](#): > > **Jotun** said: > Perhaps they are worried that a child will accidentally suffocate themselves with the improper use of a condom? Well see now this is why every sex ed course should teach kids that the condom goes on the OTHER head. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abstinence-from-sexual-activity-until-marriage-now-u-s-government-policy/353042.md?page=7)